Re: Smarthome Insteon Defective Switchlinc Replacement Program (Re: I think they've done it again)

[Marc_F_Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 11:33:05 GMT, nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dave Houston) wrote
in message  <44d31fa6.1467518703@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>I agree with Bruce that since this was not a safety issue, expecting a
>product recall is a bit much. SmartHome has always had a very good (and
>lenient) return policy. I would not expect them to offer compensation for
>the time and expense of replacing the switches. With any relatively new
>product line (especially in the consumer electronics area) the phrase
>caveat emptor should apply.
>
>I started the thread because I knew a lot of people were trying Insteon
>because of my earlier review (even some who trashed my review and have a
>6-7 year history of trashing anything I post) and because it looked like
>SH was ignoring the problem - there was a growing rumble of customer
>discontent. Soon thereafter they announced they had been able to
>duplicate the flickering and were working it. And now they've announced
>they are even reworking existing stock. All in all I think their response
>has been reasonably good - I did commend them for reworking existing
>stock. I doubt they would have incurred that expense had they not thought
>the problem serious. (It will be interesting to see whether they also
>change the triac at some future date.)
>
>I suspect that there were far more people who tried Insteon as a result
>of the promotion it received in other forums, where SmartHome press
>releases were the main fare, than as a result of anything posted to CHA.

[most of 498(!) lines deleted for brevity and clarity ]

Useful summary, Dave. In my case, though, the decision to try INSTEON had
next to nothing to do with any posts in comp.home.automation or anywhere
else, and everything to do with 1) availability of HA software/firmware
support and 2) price.

(FWIW,  I think some folks have an inflated view of the impact of
comp.home.automation. This is jist my impression because I don't actually
have any data. I am particularly skeptical of _post hoc ergo propter hoc_
causal relations that I often read about in this newsgroup. This not a
personal attack, although my continuing experience has been that this
statement will be mischaracterized as such by some regardless of what I
actually say or do.)

1) Software: Elk (firmware) and HomeSeer (software) -- both of which I use
-- both support INSTEON. Without software, HA hardware is typically
useless. It verges on mantra for me to repeat that X-10 problems aside,
most HA problems are software and programming problems in my experience
(which is admittedly atypical).

2) Price: INSTEON has, as best I know, offered at less than $20, 300-watt
ICON dimmers continuously since their introduction. (I bought some more
today.) The ICON pcb and at least most components including case (but not
front-piece) and heat sinks appear to me to be identical to those of the
600-watt V2 dimmers that are twice as expensive. Absent the availability of
the $20 INSTEONS, I would not have purchased INSTEON.

There is no other X10 alternative that comes anywhere _close_ to being as
inexpensive to purchase as INSTEON. That, and software/firmware
availability -- not reviews by or tea leaves of others --  was the second
necessary and overriding consideration (for me). (No attack; jist the
facts.)

The observation that purchasing/buy-in decisions are and were made on the
basis of availability of inexpensive ICON dimmers relates directly to the
seriousness of the "flicker" debacle  because it relates to how many
non-ICON (V2) dimmers have been sold. None of us have that data, but
SmartHome does.

ICON dimmers are rated at 300 watts. And I avoid using electronic devices
at 100% of rated load [add favorite EE dictum here].

[Therefore?] I have no problem with any ICON dimmer, nor, apparently, will
anyone else who adheres to an 80% rule, because 80% of 300 watts is 240
watts  which is < 250 watts and I have not seen any credible reports of
"flicker" below 250 watts. For us, there is no actual performance issue for
ICON dimmers.

So, FWIW, and in my opinion, and with the proviso that there are no
associated safety issues (which appears to be the case), INSTEON is fully
within its  proper rights to tell anyone who has an ICON dimmer who claims
that it flickers at 301 watts to go fly a kite. And ICONS may be the vast
majority of INSTEON dimmers out there. (There's that pesky data v.
speculation problem again.) So the problem may be much smaller in terms of
the total number of dimmers affected than the discussions here would lead
one to believe.

Mis dos centimos ... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECONtrol.org